Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Why not get rid of business class international? Why not remove crew meals? How about reducing per diem by a nickel per hour? Now you have to wear your hat to the pool while on layover...
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 430
Why not get rid of business class international? Why not remove crew meals? How about reducing per diem by a nickel per hour? Now you have to wear your hat to the pool while on layover...
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
Why not get rid of business class international? Why not remove crew meals? How about reducing per diem by a nickel per hour? Now you have to wear your hat to the pool while on layover...
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
Every contract violation needs to be rigorously fought, there are no little fish when the company violates the contract.
There is no contract violation here but there is a change in the status quo in violation of the Railway Labor Act.
Changes to "working conditions" do not have to be contract violations.
There's a ton of case law on that exact point.
The company could do this if we weren't in section 6. But we are.
Throughout this mandatory period of bargaining required under section 6 of
the RLA and the mediation process set forth in section 155 including the 30 day
cooling-off period after the failure of the mediatory efforts, the parties may
not alter the status quo, i.e., neither party may implement a change in the
actual objective working conditions broadly conceived, whether embodied in
agreements or not.
US Supreme Court
Detroit & Toledo Shore Line Railroad v. United Transportation Union, 396 U.S. 142
(1969).
We need to be precise in our terminology.
There is no contract violation here but there is a change in the status quo in violation of the Railway Labor Act.
Changes to "working conditions" do not have to be contract violations.
There's a ton of case law on that exact point.
The company could do this if we weren't in section 6. But we are.
There is no contract violation here but there is a change in the status quo in violation of the Railway Labor Act.
Changes to "working conditions" do not have to be contract violations.
There's a ton of case law on that exact point.
The company could do this if we weren't in section 6. But we are.
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,873
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Decoupled
Posts: 922
Not only would EC no longer be available 24 hours prior, changes to "premium" seats are no longer available.
Under the new marketing definitions, all window and aisle seats are "premium", also. Granted, it's not much of a premium, but there is an upcharge.
That means you cannot change to a window or aisle seat, either.
Under the new marketing definitions, all window and aisle seats are "premium", also. Granted, it's not much of a premium, but there is an upcharge.
That means you cannot change to a window or aisle seat, either.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: A330 First Officer
Posts: 1,465
no, it's not. Try reading the monthly update that went out today from Crew Resources. It clearly states it is no longer available for deadhead bookings or company business. Further, it states that PSUP will not be added to the Comfort Plus upgrade list like the first class upgrade list. Thanks for playing though....
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,399
Your two examples would be a contractual violation, as they are defined in the contract specifically. Economy Comfort DHs are not spelled out in the contract. Perhaps this is a "status quo" violation, but message board venting doesn't set the standard. Legal experts do.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Petting Zoo
Posts: 2,074
It may or may not be an intentional stick in the eye. Since I've been able to secure comfort seat on deadhead exactly 0.0 times I can't get too worked up.
However, on the topic of sticks in the eyes.....a spa? They are taking a chunk of the pilot lounge and turning it into....a ********* spa? I can imagine how pilots have been lining up for years begging the company to offer them a spa in the pilot lounge. Or maybe not so much.
Am I being overly sensitive or did that not come across as a bit of an F you?
However, on the topic of sticks in the eyes.....a spa? They are taking a chunk of the pilot lounge and turning it into....a ********* spa? I can imagine how pilots have been lining up for years begging the company to offer them a spa in the pilot lounge. Or maybe not so much.
Am I being overly sensitive or did that not come across as a bit of an F you?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post